Prevention and Absenteeism Approach 2008 Report 09.02.2009
Last summer the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment published a report on the Prevention and Absenteeism Approach 2008. During this survey in February and March last year, Dutch CAOs (Collective Labour Agreements) were considered in terms of their provisions on preventing and tackling absenteeism (due to illness) in the workplace. The intention was to update earlier research from 2005 and 2006 and to detail new developments. The survey was based on a random sampling of a total of 116 CAOs. All CAOs, as turned out, contained one or more provisions on preventing absenteeism. Researchers were concerned largely with provisions
Last summer the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment published a report on the Prevention and Absenteeism Approach 2008. During this survey in February and March last year, Dutch CAOs (Collective Labour Agreements) were considered in terms of their provisions on preventing and tackling absenteeism (due to illness) in the workplace. The intention was to update earlier research from 2005 and 2006 and to detail new developments.
The survey was based on a random sampling of a total of 116 CAOs. All CAOs, as turned out, contained one or more provisions on preventing absenteeism. Researchers were concerned largely with provisions on information and advice (in 49 percent of the CAOs studied), occupational health and safety provision (40 per cent) and studies or research (35 per cent). In 43 per cent of the CAOs investigated, researchers found at least one provision covering regular company medical testing (PAGO in its Dutch acronym). Most provisions involved testing at the request of the employer or because of the employee’s age. Only 15 per cent of the randomly-sampled CAOs incorporated provisions about creating a handicap-friendly working environment. And only 20 per cent described provisions about prevention and tackling specific workplace risks in a risk assessment and evaluation (RI&E).
In terms of provisions for avoiding workplace risks, stipulations covering undesirable practices are at the top of the list (68 per cent of the CAOs), followed by seniors (61 per cent), safety and/or hazardous work and psychosocial workload (both 47 per cent). Apparently prospective maternity yields a very minimal risk of absenteeism. Provisions about the duties of pregnant employees are only included in 5 per cent of the CAOs. Modification of duties for female employees after giving birth is only reported in 2 per cent (1 per cent of all employees).
For the first time the 2008 report includes the topic of health management. In 8 per cent of the randomly-sampled CAOs (applying to 3 per cent of the employees) the researchers found stipulations evidencing a health management programme.
The report can be found at www.szw.nl
